Behold! The new generation of RPG fans! Part 2

[Raymondo]

is that better?

I don't know, what about aisle 7?

Yeah that would fix in better.

 

[Vault Dweller]

*rings the mod bell* clean up, aisle three ... k thx

lol, what he said and I'd like to use this opportunity to thank everybody who helped ruin this thread.

 

[Constipated Craprunner]

Good god, dont we have *enough* topics on how stupid current RPG players are? You know, I think if anything we could fit a fuking sub-forum on "BioHateing". I appreciate the fact that the majority of the times your arguments are well constructed and logical (much moreso at least than your opponents), but do we really need an hourly update on how depressing the modern market of RPGs are?

 

[Spazmo]

Yes.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I appreciate the fact that the majority of the times your arguments are well constructed and logical (much moreso at least than your opponents), but do we really need an hourly update on how depressing the modern market of RPGs are?

You are absolutely right! However...don't you hate when people agree with you only to insert "however" or "but"? ...anyway, like I was saying, however, considering that:

1. It's been a very long while since we played a decent RPG (my last one was Prelude and it was around January),
2. And that since that we discussed every little fucking thing there is to discuss about Bioware, good games, bad games, games in between, upcoming games,
3. And that the boards come to life only when an angry and/or ignorant noob makes an angry and/or ignorant post,

I thought that it would be amusing to post some funnies. Having a choice I'd rather be playing a game, but I don't have any. I'm bored and as Yoda said boredom leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to the Dark Side :twisted:
* suddenly starts undergoing transformation Bio-style: hair gets all spiky, the eyes turn red and become somewhat shifty like the dog in the Simpsons *

From now on you can refer to me as Darth Dweller, now I have to go to find me a double lightaxe+5 vs morons.

 

[Skorpios]

I guess I'm sorry for ruining this thread (although I'll ask AGAIN, who was it who raised the rape issue?), but if you don't want me to comment on these threads it's simple:

Don't invite me. My name was mentioned twice in this thread before I even posted. If that wasn't designed to grab my interest then what was it designed to do? If you want to mangle morons, go ahead, just don't connect my name to it!

 

[Vault Dweller]

Don't invite me. My name was mentioned twice in this thread before I even posted.

Who are you? Beetlejuice?

Seriously though, I don't mind yours comments, but I'd appreciate if you start new threads dedicating to serious issues instead of derailing existing threads. Yes, it was Saint who mentioned the rape example, but it was you who started a moral debate "what's worse: murder or rape" like that was the point.

 

[Skorpios]

Vault_Dweller, I did not intend to derail this thread, I simply posted my opinion that your first 'moron' didn't strike me as all that much of a moron. As that was my opinion of his post, how was it different to everyone else's opinions of his post?

SP imported the 'rape' quote from another thread that I wasn't even aware of - so how was I to respond except in the general 'moral' sense? I replied in kind by alluding to SP's insistence on being able to kill ALL NPCs in games. How is unlimited murder any less 'moral' than rape? SP's point was that the guy was a moron because he wanted rape as a game feature. I was just comparing that to SP's own morals to try and highlight how hypocritical that judgement was if you try to apply real morals to games. It wasn't meant to be a 'murder is worse than rape or vice versa' argument. Just a general comment on (the lack of) morality in games.

If games constantly tell us that killing is OK, why is it so unbelievable that some folks get mixed moral messages and start expecting rape in games as well? Even though we know it is impossible as no game with non-consenting sex would ever get a rating. But it does seem hypocritical to criticise someone's moral stance when your own is just as indefensible. Killing is an acceptable part of our 'culture'? Hmmm, I'm glad I don't live in your neighbourhood!

Again, I question your accusation that I derailed this thread - my original post was well within the original direction, it was SP who started throwing worlds like 'rape' around, not me. And then plenty of other people started running with it, in much more disruptive directions than I ever did. I'm not accepting sole responsibility for disrupting this thread, thank you very much Vault_Dweller.

Also, I HAVE started threads about more serious issues - and what are we discussing in them now? Pie and Bioware Bashing. So don't tell me that derailing threads isn't a regular occurrence here and that I'm some sort of evil boogeyman.

No, I'm not Beetlejuice, but am I correct in thinking that if I started a new thread with the words:

"Well, Vault_Dweller has sucked all the excitement out of my 'Rape is fun' thread, so...."

You wouldn't be even the slightest bit tempted to make a comment? As I said before, if you want to bash morons just leave me completely out of it, but if you WANT me to comment then please invite me back as you did in this thread.

3. And that the boards come to life only when an angry and/or ignorant noob makes an angry and/or ignorant post,

Hmmm, aren't I doing you guys a favour then with my angry and irrational posts? Make up your mind, do you want me around or not?

Very good point about the lack of games to play/discuss though Vault_Dweller, I'm pretty much in the same boat. I originally came here to talk about Lionheart and we all know how THAT turned out. Just my luck to like a game that the majority here seems to loathe. *waves to Saint_Proverbius*

 

[Psilon]

If games constantly tell us that killing is OK, why is it so unbelievable that some folks get mixed moral messages and start expecting rape in games as well?

Yes, and games with petty larceny (e.g., any adventure game ever) lead people to expect arson, Ponzi schemes, and violations of the remaining sodomy statutes. Uh-huh. Never mind that the two offenses are pretty separate.

Even though we know it is impossible as no game with non-consenting sex would ever get a rating. But it does seem hypocritical to criticise someone's moral stance when your own is just as indefensible. Killing is an acceptable part of our 'culture'? Hmmm, I'm glad I don't live in your neighbourhood!

First, that's what the AO rating is for. Second, killing is very much a part of American culture, though as a self-proclaimed Australian you might not be aware of it. We have a constitutional right, sayeth the gun lobby, to arm ourselves with any weapon we choose. Our unelected President is hell-bent on invading any Third World country that looks at us funny, and after assassinating Saddam's two sons we had to display them publicly to ensure we get the proper credit. A minor, but still significant, proportion of our population is obsessed with refighting the Civil War and/or forming a neo-fascist "people's militia." Most of our top-performing movies have damned high body counts. Hell, look at the IMDb ratings: Godfather, Star Wars, LotR, Pulp Fiction, the Matrix... All of them glory in "bad people getting theirs."

Killing is very much a part of our culture. As a result, murder's really only condemned if someone knows the innocent victim. Make it one of Them (insert any currently-despided group here), or add someone else's uniform, and most people don't really care much once it's off the evening news. Rape, on the other hand, has been condemned since about seven hours after the fledgling Romans ran off with the Sabine womenfolk. It didn't get any better with the all-sex-is-evil Puritan morality around Washington. Did you know it's illegal in Illinois for a man to walk around with his genitals "in a discernibly turgid state," even through clothing? Put a rape scene in a game and watch the entire platform be banned. If you're lucky. We stick to unrestricted violence because we can get away with it, and because it's easy to use in a game design. Not since Custer's Revenge has anyone tried openly to sell a game based on forced carnal knowledge.

So, given that, you can damn well expect any US-made M-rated game to have no rape--except for either a traumatic flashback or a clumsy attempt that ends with a spiked boot in the crotch--and a body count to rival D-Day. You want an M rating for language? Play The Longest Journey, Grand Theft Auto 1 with the IAMGARYPENN code, or wait for "The Big Lebowski 3D." As for nonconsensual sex acts, go play one of the hentai games reviewed at Something Awful.

I originally came here to talk about Lionheart and we all know how THAT turned out. Just my luck to like a game that the majority here seems to loathe.

For the last time, we were suspicious because of the coverage (real-time SPECIAL, lots of phat lewt, an initial lack of the Speech skill, and--let's face it--Interplay). Only with the demo did it turn to outright "loathing." If all you really want to do is talk Lionheart, quit whining and hang around a Lionheart site.

 

[Skorpios]

I'm still trying to work out what you mean by 'self-proclaimed Australian' as if I'm trying to pretend to be something I'm not. I'm an Australian - the RPGCodex registration form has a box marked 'location', so I put where I am. Doesn't seem too difficult to comprehend or get all snarky about.

Still you can't deny that media in general, including computer games, send some very mixed messages when it comes to morality. We can argue for days about which crimes are worse, but are you seriously saying that human life has no value? I think not. But that is the message many games promote so why shouldn't that lead to the blurring of all sorts of moral boundaries?

I mean, if it is OK to attack a woman with a huge bloody greatsword (in a game) how far away is that from a rape fantasy? If her life has no meaning, then certainly her body and her free will don't either. Saying that killing is 'OK' just because the majority of media outlets glorify it seems a little simplistic to me. It's obviously that kind of thinking that led our original 'moron' to expect rape in his games.

Also, if you think rape is simply about sexual gratification then you have no idea what you are talking about. Rape is purely and simply about power, it is imposing your will via a sexual act on a helpless victim. Sex is only the means, the end is demonstrating complete power over another individual. It is why rape has been a constant tool of 'brave soldiers' throughout history once the 'glorious' killing has ended. Rape is not a sexual act, it is an act of violence, just like murder. Thus both are equally abhorrent.

When I made my original point about killing/murder I was referring to the ability, requested by some, to attack ALL NPCs in a game. No mention of 'baddies' or 'the enemy'. ALL NPCs. If the game has any sort of realistic society then that includes women, children, the injured, the sick, officers of the law, community leaders, tradespeople, and your allies and friends. No mention of extenuating circumstances or self-defense, just the ability to walk up to an NPC, pull out your weapon and kill them. All in the name of 'gameplay freedom'. Now if that isn't morally questionable, what is??

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of making moral judgements about games and gamers when your own position is morally uncertain and games seem to have no morality anyway..

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I think the best part about this thread is Skorpios's inconsistancy. He says he wouldn't want rape as a gameplay feature, then he procedes to justify it with several arguments.

 

[Psilon]

Most of which are essentially saying "well, murder and arson are in, so why not rape, insider trading, and a bit of barratry?"

 

[Crazy Tuvok]

Moreover plenty of games *do* have morality in them. PS:T, FO and even Mafia come to mind right off the top of my head.

 

[Sharpei_Diem]

Most of which are essentially saying "well, murder and arson are in, so why not rape, insider trading, and a bit of barratry?"

just so long as you remember it's not considered evil unless you receive money for it...

 

[Psilon]

And what a lot of people seem to forget is that even the Grand Theft Auto series discourages random psychopathic behavior. You start mowing down every civilian you see, and the next thing you know an FBI, SWAT, or army guy is kneeling down before you and asking you "Sir, do you have a license to bleed on our sidewalk?"

Being a serial killer and being a successful criminal a la Tommy Vercetti are two entirely different things.

 

[Skorpios]

SP, please point out where I justified rape as a game feature? I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion.

From what I understand the original quote that started all this went something like:

"Please throw in some violence, rape and gore." or words to that effect. Correct?

You then pointed that out as an example of how stupid this guy was.

I just pointed out YOUR inconsistency in that you often promote the use of violence and gore in games (which Vault_Dweller's pet moron also wanted) but somehow rape is beyond the pale. I believe that kind of selective morality is hypocritical and had little to do with the discussion at hand.

In doing so you seem to now believe that my point was:

Games contain violence.

Violence is wrong.

Rape is wrong.

Games should therefore contain rape.

That is completely incorrect and was never my intent. If you misinterpret my point, that doesn't make me inconsistent, just unclear

My point was actually closer to this:

SP thinks anyone who wants rape in a game is stupid.

SP wants unfettered murder in RPGs but is smart

Rape is immoral and unpleasant AND murder is immoral and unpleasant - so how can we tell the stupid guys from the smart ones using just this criteria?

Introducing moral values into a discussion of games just doesn't prove very much - that was my point and then people started getting serious about the whole rape vs murder issue.

 

[MF]

Well I have always wondered one thing.
In Fallout, in Junktown, you have a prostitute that is held under fire. You can opt to help her by talking the guy out of killing her or blasting the guy to bits. You can also leave the scene to let her die.

Anyway, I always figured that scene should have been a rape-attempt. It just seemed more 'logical' to me, and I thought it was a slight bit of censorship, despite Fallout's M-rating.

Then again, it is also very much possible that it was simply wat it was. In fact, that's just the way it was and I can't dispute it. But I felt that a rape would fit better, there, somehow. Anybody else had this feeling?

Also, I believe you are discussing player rape here, so this may be off-topic. Saving someone from being raped or leaving them be is another thing than having the character have an active part in the rape. That said, I see no problems with it. It's just as wrong as killling someone. It's not a feature I'd want, or a feature I'd miss, but I wouldn't mind seeing it. It adds variety to murder. I mean, rape happens in books.

 

[Astromarine]

there is no better way to guarantee that a game developer will never work again.

Americans are funny bastards. Beheadings are healthier than any kind of sex, and watching a movie about rape is a deeply unsettling experience while watching, say, silence of the lambs is culture and entertainment.

Go figure

 

[Rabby]

Though this doesn't really relate to CRPGs, I must ditto the raised-eyebrow confusion on American mentality. It's okay to blow up helicopters with people inside (see Mission Impossible) or engage in violent brawl-fests (see Marvel Comics), yet the moment sex is involved, parents frown and the community is mad.

Perhaps it has to do with the religion, where the Christian God doesn't wince at smiting entire nations, but sex is a sin.

In regards to rape in CRPGs, I've always interpreted that miner-cutting-up-a-whore incident in the Malamute Saloon at Redding to involve some degree of rape. But then it could just be me and my demented little self. :wink:

 

[Psilon]

Hey, I was pretty unsettled by Silence of the Lambs too. Movie-wise, it's generally redshirts and villains that get the chop (so to speak). You don't really see any attempt to portray either sympathetically. A movie about rape generally goes into the consequences and motivations for such a deed. That's generally why it's more disturbing than, say, a detective-POV murder mystery or the likes of Terminator 3.

Personally, I'm not too big a fan of either act. One of them, however, is a hell of a lot easier than the other to work into a gameplay mechanic. We can rarely even see daily routines or universal mortality (e.g., charging Vivec with a bloody huge sword and winning), and both are probably a lot easier to script. Personally, I have no problem with games rated M for language or drug use rather than the other stuff. If you can do something M- or AO-rated artistically, go for it. If it makes for good gameplay, go for it. I have no problems with UT2003 and its ilk. It doesn't even need k3wl bl00d eff3cts; I liked Elite Force and would play the "nonviolent" shooters if they didn't suck. If it's just in there for shock value or a back-of-box feature point, I don't need it.

But yeah, we Americans are pretty damn bizarre as a group.